MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7111811386

Diversity and Habitat Use of Bats in Modified Suburban Landscapes

2025· article· W7111811386 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - Ursinus (Ursinus College) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatInsectivoreHuman echolocationWildlifeDiversity (politics)BiodiversityEcological nicheWildlife management
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bats occupy critical ecological niches and perform important ecosystem services like controlling insect populations. However, humans have altered bat habitat substantially, resulting in the reduction of bat populations. The goals of this research are to assess bat diversity and habitat use across different levels of suburban habitat modification. To accomplish this, we deployed passive acoustic recorders at twelve locations with varying human impact in Montgomery County, Pennsylvania. In accordance with The North American Bat Monitoring Program’s standards, acoustic analysis software was used to identify bat species. Manual identification methods from The Canadian Wildlife Health Cooperative were used to verify these results. Insectivorous bats were present at every recording site. Seven species were identified, and diversity was largely similar across sites. Four common species were active at most sites including two rare species in our region. These findings underscore the ability for some bats to persist across a suburban habitat mosaic, highlights the need to support habitat for rare species, and call for continued monitoring to inform adaptive management strategies and ensure long-term sustainability.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.187 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - Ursinus (Ursinus College)Same topicBat Biology and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207